Digraph vs HubSpot AEO pricing
| Plan detail | Digraph | HubSpot AEO |
|---|---|---|
| Lowest published price | Free for 14 days, then $99/mo | $50/mo |
| Plan and billing | Standard, billed monthly | HubSpot AEO ($45 billed yearly) |
| Allowance | 30 prompts, 1 brand | 25 prompts |
| AI coverage | Supported AI models | 3 AI engines |
| Next plan | Pro $249/mo: 300 prompts, 3 brands | See HubSpot AEO’s pricing page |
Lowest published plan for each vendor; billing terms differ. See which AI systems Digraph checks and how.
Features compared
| Capability | Digraph | HubSpot AEO |
|---|---|---|
| Published entry pricing | Standard: $99/month for 30 tracked prompts and 1 brand. | HubSpot AEO: $50/month ($45 annually) for 25 prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini; a free trial is available. |
| Prompt and answer limits | Standard and Pro publish 30 and 300 tracked prompts; Pro supports 3 brands. | Standalone HubSpot AEO lists 25 daily prompts and 2,500 monthly answers; Marketing Hub Enterprise lists expanded limits. |
| AI-system coverage | Standard and Pro list supported AI models. | HubSpot AEO’s standalone product supports ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini; verify which modes, regions, and future engine additions apply to the purchased tier. |
| Competitor and citation context | Inspect full answers, recommendations, competitor mentions, cited URLs, source domains, and changes over time. | HubSpot lists brand visibility, sentiment, competitor share of voice, citation analysis, exact prompt responses, and recommendations; inspect source-level exports in a trial. |
| Optimization workflow | Route observed visibility gaps into audits, analysis, Signal, and agent workflows tied to prompt and source evidence. | Standalone AEO provides prioritized recommendations; Marketing Hub Pro and Enterprise add CRM-based prompt suggestions and content generation or actions. |
| Integrations and access | Reports and exports are public-plan capabilities; API access is listed for Enterprise. | HubSpot’s differentiator is native CRM and Marketing Hub context; confirm the subscription, permissions, export fields, and content workflow required for the desired actions. |
Key differences between Digraph and HubSpot AEO
HubSpot AEO and Digraph both track brand visibility, competitors, citations, and sentiment in AI answers. HubSpot emphasizes an accessible standalone price, daily tracking across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini, prioritized recommendations, and deeper CRM or content actions inside Marketing Hub. Digraph emphasizes a defined prompt portfolio, full answer evidence, cited URLs, source domains, competitor context, and connected audit or analysis workflows across supported model APIs. Their plan units and integration boundaries differ, so compare the same prompts and answer evidence before choosing.
A cheaper entry plan does not mean equivalent coverage
HubSpot AEO publishes $50/month for 25 prompts across three engines, while Digraph Standard publishes 30 prompts across supported model APIs and Pro publishes 300 prompts across three brands. Prompt count alone does not show model modes, answer sampling, markets, source retention, or brand slots. Use the same workload model before comparing price.
Compare CRM context with answer-level evidence
HubSpot positions CRM-connected suggestions and content actions as the deeper Marketing Hub workflow. Digraph emphasizes the prompt, full answer, recommendation context, cited URL, source domain, competitor framing, and follow-up analysis behind a finding. Test whether each recommendation can be traced to a specific answer and citation, not only to an aggregate visibility score.
Validate the three-engine boundary
HubSpot’s standalone AEO documentation names ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity, with daily tracking. Digraph lists supported AI models on Standard and Pro. Run the same dated prompt set across the overlapping engines, record full answers and citations, and document which additional engines or modes are essential for your audience.
Separate product price from suite cost
HubSpot AEO can be purchased standalone, but CRM-based prompt suggestions and deeper content actions depend on Marketing Hub Pro or Enterprise. Digraph publishes its AI-search workflow directly in the product plans, with API access listed for Enterprise. Compare the total subscription, seats, permissions, exports, content execution, and analyst effort required to close a visibility gap.
Run a controlled side-by-side pilot
Use the same brand, competitors, categories, markets, language, buyer questions, active engines, collection window, and reporting format. Record full answers, prompt and model context, brand position, competitor mentions, sentiment, cited URLs, source domains, recommendations, integrations used, refresh time, and resource consumed. Compare one recurring report and one verified follow-up action before choosing the operating model.
Need the work done, not another tool?
A tracking tool tells you where you stand in AI answers; it does not write the content, fix the site or earn the mentions that change them. Digraph is an AI marketing agency: we measure on our own platform and do that work for you, starting with a one-off audit.
See our AEO agency servicesHow to evaluate both
This documentation-based comparison was reviewed September 21, 2026; it is not a hands-on benchmark. HubSpot publishes AEO at $50/month ($45 annually) with 25 prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini, plus visibility, sentiment, competitor share of voice, citation analysis, prompt tracking, and prioritized recommendations. Its knowledge base lists 2,500 monthly answers and daily prompt tracking for the standalone plan, with expanded limits in Marketing Hub Enterprise. Digraph lists Standard at $99/month for 30 prompts and 1 brand and Pro at $249/month for 300 prompts and 3 brands across supported model APIs. HubSpot adds CRM-connected recommendations and content actions in Marketing Hub, while Digraph emphasizes cross-engine answer evidence and connected analysis. Normalize prompt runs, engines, CRM context, citations, recommendations, and content workflow before comparing value.
Sources reviewed
HubSpot AEO’s capabilities are summarized from the official sources below. This is a documentation-based comparison published by Digraph, not a hands-on benchmark.
Common questions
How does Digraph compare with HubSpot AEO?
HubSpot AEO and Digraph both track brand visibility, competitors, citations, and sentiment in AI answers. HubSpot emphasizes an accessible standalone price, daily tracking across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini, prioritized recommendations, and deeper CRM or content actions inside Marketing Hub. Digraph emphasizes a defined prompt portfolio, full answer evidence, cited URLs, source domains, competitor context, and connected audit or analysis workflows across supported model APIs. Their plan units and integration boundaries differ, so compare the same prompts and answer evidence before choosing.
How does HubSpot AEO pricing compare with Digraph?
HubSpot AEO’s lowest published plan is $50/mo (HubSpot AEO ($45 billed yearly)) with 25 prompts and 3 AI engines. Digraph starts with a 14-day free trial; Standard is then $99/mo billed monthly for 30 prompts, 1 brand across supported model APIs, and Pro is $249/mo for 300 prompts, 3 brands. Billing basis, collection surfaces, and plan units differ, so confirm current terms with both vendors.
Is Digraph a good HubSpot AEO alternative?
Digraph is a fit for teams comparing a low-cost three-engine AEO tracker connected to a broader CRM and content suite with a cross-engine evidence and investigation workflow. Run the same buyer prompts in both products and compare the full answers, citations, and next actions before deciding.
Can Digraph complement an existing HubSpot AEO workflow?
Yes. Many teams use more than one research or measurement system. Digraph adds an evidence-led view of AI answers, prompts, citations, competitors, and follow-up work alongside the tools SEO, brand, and content teams already use.
How should I run a fair AI visibility evaluation?
Use the same prompt portfolio, competitors, markets, AI systems, and reporting period in each tool. Review the underlying answers and sources, not only aggregate scores, before choosing a workflow.